From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: proposal: modularize unpack in gnu build system Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:49:33 +0100 Message-ID: <87o9krsmtu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87po5bi4bx.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46055) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1elxRL-00021T-Gb for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:49:40 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1elxRI-0007Xg-BX for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:49:39 -0500 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([185.233.100.1]:42692) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1elxRI-0007XP-5K for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 08:49:36 -0500 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22G=C3=A1bor?= Boskovits"'s message of "Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:12:52 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= Boskovits Cc: Guix-devel Hi G=C3=A1bor, G=C3=A1bor Boskovits skribis: > 2018-02-11 22:50 GMT+01:00 Ricardo Wurmus : > >> >> G=C3=A1bor Boskovits writes: >> >> > It seems, that currently we don't have zip in gnu build system, so that >> > ends up in native-inputs, if we need that to unpack the tarball. >> > >> > It would be nice if gnu-build-system would use the appropriate >> compressor, >> > and at the same time only depend on the one needed. How could this be >> > achieved? >> >> Why is this necessary? I don=E2=80=99t see a problem with adding =E2=80= =9Cunzip=E2=80=9D to the >> native-inputs when it is needed to unpack a zip archive. >> >> In my opinion this is so easy that I don=E2=80=99t think the slight incr= ease in >> convenience would be worth the change. >> >> > You might be right about that. What I feel is that: > 1. this is a recurring newbie question on the irc channel, I've seen it > already a few times, so support time could be reduced > 2. this change could make adding new archive types easier in the future. FWIW I pretty much agree with Ricardo here. I understand your concerns, yet it seems to me that this is a minor annoyance (zip archives for source code are not that frequent anyway), new archive types for source code don=E2=80=99t show up that often either, and overall I=E2=80=99m wary = of =E2=80=9Cover-engineering=E2=80=9D things like this. Ludo=E2=80=99.